W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2010

Re: [css3-background] Where we are with Blur value discussion

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:06:57 -0700
Message-Id: <3B3D3DBF-902C-4DB3-8ECD-DF64D25DF533@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Brendan Kenny <bckenny@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Can you suggest changes then, that would still allow the blur length value provided by the author to be a measurable output of the algorithm instead of a 'radius' or 'standard deviation' input? As an implementer, you are also probably better (than me anyway) at knowing what inputs to use in order to get the desired results expressed at the beginning of this thread. 


Brad Kemper

On Jul 14, 2010, at 4:56 PM, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday 2010-07-14 16:19 -0700, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> That part's not acceptable.  Authors win over implementors in general,
>> and in this case having the authors perform mental math or
>> guess-and-check every single time they use a shadow (or force them to
>> develop an intuition for it) versus implementors figuring out the
>> proper conversion once and putting that in their code isn't even a
>> contest.  Authors win.
> 
> Authors don't read the spec every time they use the 'box-shadow'
> property, and most don't read it ever.  So the spec should still
> describe how it works using existing terminology that implementors
> will understand.
> 
> I'm fine with having you come up with a measurement that you think
> is better for authors.
> 
> However, that measurement should be explained in the spec in terms
> of the normal terminology used to describe blur effects.
> 
> And writing the explanation in terms of the normal terminology might
> lead you to discover places where you've invented your own
> terminology where the existing terminology will work just fine.
> 
> -David
> 
> -- 
> L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
> Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Thursday, 15 July 2010 00:08:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:29 GMT